AngryJailhouseFistfark:brigid_fitch: Don't know if this was posted yet but someone on CNN this morning suggested that he set up the booby traps as a diversion prior to him gunning down theater patrons. He put on some techno music full-volume before leaving for the theater. The guess is he expected a neighbor to complain & someone, either the superintendent or the cops, to open the door, triggering a bunch of bombs & gasoline, and blow the building sky-high. That would give him more time for his rampage while first-responders were dealing with an apartment building on fire.

Seems rather complicated. Why not just put the explosives on a timer, that'd be more reliable than the off-chance someone comes a-knockin', or calls cops who'll bust in the door.

That's the only thing making me think he planned on offing himself. Then, after he's dead, one last slap in the face to the cops or whoever.

To me, it has to be all about the timer on the stereo. Not a timer on the bombs, but on the stereo. It wasn't just to blow the building up, it was designed to kill. A simple timer on the bomb itself would have been sufficient to draw nearly every first responsder, 2nd, 3rd, 4th prolly as well, to that scene. But no, he needed someone else there to set it off. Why? All that does is remove the "when" from the equation, and takes it out of his hands. It removes its ability to act as a deterrent, because as we saw, the thing never went off. This makes me discredit the "distract the cops" idea.

But, if I rule out "deterent", then I am left with 2 other options: "attack on cops", or "personal attack against someone in the building". If the stereo goes off before the attack, then the cops (or his neighbors) would come and the place would blow and he'd have more time at the theater. This didn't happen, and wasn't designed to happen. He had no control of when that thing would blow up. If the stereo comes on after the shootout, did he really think 911 would respond to a noise complaint? No, perhaps he was baiting the neighbor to enter his apartment.

Dimensio:The AR-15 platform is popular amongst hunters and target shooters. Your claim that no valid reason exists to own one is therefore a lie.

Please explain why you should be considered credible following your demonstrable use of lies.

Someone needs a semi-auto rifle to hunt? Again, they must suck... maybe they should give up hunting.

redmid17:Well now you're talking about outlawing guns that make up about 70% of guns sold in 2006. Banning everything semi-auto means you'll have probably tens of millions (at the very least) of illegal guns in the hands of civilians. How do propose on addressing that?

You don't have to stop selling the guns, just stop selling the semi-auto variety. If they can be either/or, I assume there's a way to modify existing guns to turn them single-fire. Perhaps along with the ban there's subsidies for gun-owners to make the modifications, or sell them back to the government.

stonicus:That made sense in Hamilton's time because it was actually possible. That isn't possible anymore. Do you know what it would take for the civilian population to compete with the military? Do you know what we'd have to be able to be allowed to own, to even have a miniscule chance in hell of competeing with the military?

Exactly. That Red Dawn/zombie apocalypse/government revolution idea is pure fantasy wank. The next logical step is to make it reality, like the Aurora psycho did. You're the problem if you believe that's a sound reason.

redmid17:Frank N Stein: To those that think an armed citizenry cannot over throw the government: You won't sound so smug when Tea Baggers take over the country and you have armored hover rounds rolling down your street

/In actuality a citizenry that can properly shoot would be very important in a time of nation crisis/invasion/draft.//Shooting clubs taught future WW2 GIs how to operate the M1 before they entered service

The US Army ran a civilian marksmanship program for almost 100 years AND sold surplus rifles to the members of said program until 1996, but guns are bad so we can't do that anymore.

Love the CMP. Looking for an affiliated club so I can get my hands on a Garand

Frank N Stein:redmid17: Frank N Stein: To those that think an armed citizenry cannot over throw the government: You won't sound so smug when Tea Baggers take over the country and you have armored hover rounds rolling down your street

/In actuality a citizenry that can properly shoot would be very important in a time of nation crisis/invasion/draft.//Shooting clubs taught future WW2 GIs how to operate the M1 before they entered service

The US Army ran a civilian marksmanship program for almost 100 years AND sold surplus rifles to the members of said program until 1996, but guns are bad so we can't do that anymore.

Love the CMP. Looking for an affiliated club so I can get my hands on a Garand

Haha I wish I could afford a garand. I'll stick with my $99 mosin-nagant and its dirty ammo for the time being

Mugato:stonicus: That made sense in Hamilton's time because it was actually possible. That isn't possible anymore. Do you know what it would take for the civilian population to compete with the military? Do you know what we'd have to be able to be allowed to own, to even have a miniscule chance in hell of competeing with the military?

I know, I hate that argument. If the government becomes "formidable to the liberties of the people", you gun nuts aren't going to do a damned thing and you know it.

Why do you assume that every single tank commander, pilot and GI is on your side?

Sure tanks and helicopters and fighter/bombers are dangerous.....but you are forgetting that they all need a man or woman in the seat to perform their job. Even predator drones that can fire hellfire missles needs a person at the controls in one location or another.

Some people have this fantasy of revolting against the government....but it;'s just as bad a fantasy as those who think the manpower of the US government are all in favor of stepping on the necks of Americans.

What happens when the pilot takes off...then promplty turns back to base and levels it?

redmid17:Frank N Stein: To those that think an armed citizenry cannot over throw the government: You won't sound so smug when Tea Baggers take over the country and you have armored hover rounds rolling down your street

/In actuality a citizenry that can properly shoot would be very important in a time of nation crisis/invasion/draft.//Shooting clubs taught future WW2 GIs how to operate the M1 before they entered service

The US Army ran a civilian marksmanship program for almost 100 years AND sold surplus rifles to the members of said program until 1996, but guns are bad so we can't do that anymore.

Fano:Ask the Vietnamese what level of weaponry you need to grind American forces to a halt.

I love how gun nuts have this masturbatory fantasy about fighting our own military.

In Viet Nam, we invaded them on their turf. We were under-equipped. And we were fighting everyone in the country while destroying half of it. Now how the FARK could that be close to the same scenario as a very small percent of our citizens rising up against our own military?

Christ guys, just nut up and admit you like your toys and cut the Red Dawn shiat.

quiotu:Yes, I'm aware semi-auto includes machine pistols. If you're defending yourself and need semi-auto, your aim sucks and you shouldn't have a gun.

You are quite confused.

Let me help you with terms.

Semi-automatic simply means when you pul the trigger, one shot is fired and the next round is loaded automatically. It is half (semi) automatic, only the loading cycle is automatic. Examples of semi-automatic weapons include varmint rifles, Ruger mini rifles, 1911 handguns, police handguns such as Beretta M9s and Glocks or all types.

Fully-automatic means the loading AND firing happen automatically. You hold the trigger down and you get multiple shots. Some designs limit the number of rapid fire shots in a single pull, others simply fire until the ammo is exhausted or the trigger is released.

Machine Pistols are a specific type of weapon that use pistol calibers, versus rifle calibers, are are capably of fully automatic fire. Mac 10s are examples of these. The early Tec 9s could be converted to machine pistols.

Semi-automatic rifles come in many styles and are used for hunting and target shooting. Semi-auto handguns are the most common among law enforcement today and are preferred for self defense and carry models. FBI and Secret Service carry semi-automatic pistols. Skill has nothing to do with the platform.

And as long as this is a ballistics primer, you should know that fully automatic fire, even from a shoulder fired rifle, is not accurate. Even more so in a hand-held, short barreled weapon like a machine pistol. Tactically, it is primarily used as 'suppression' fire. In a military engagement, the preferred shots are aimed single shots, but to force an enemy position to take cover and not return fire, spraying a volume or rounds, that may lack accuracy, soldiers switch to full auto.

griffer:I am not saying no regulation, rather I am asking that we sponsor legislation that makes rational sense and isn't motivated by fear.

One last point about the specific weapon, the M&P15 and other AR-15 style weapons. The M&P15 is designed as a tactical weapon. That means its intended to be used against people. Let's not be blind to that point. But I know many property owners in the wake of Katrina were very happy to have tactical rifles in their possession to defend their property....

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just stating that semi-auto suddenly makes a gun much more lethal. If there's a single-fire version of the AR-15, and I'm sure there is, then go ahead and sell it. If you need semi-auto to defend yourself, then it's probably because the people around you also have them. The solution can't be the problem as well, sorry but that just becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy then.

/my gun knowledge is limited, but I'm pretty sure semi-auto isn't needed other than to make you feel better

HotWingConspiracy:redmid17: Frank N Stein: To those that think an armed citizenry cannot over throw the government: You won't sound so smug when Tea Baggers take over the country and you have armored hover rounds rolling down your street

/In actuality a citizenry that can properly shoot would be very important in a time of nation crisis/invasion/draft.//Shooting clubs taught future WW2 GIs how to operate the M1 before they entered service

The US Army ran a civilian marksmanship program for almost 100 years AND sold surplus rifles to the members of said program until 1996, but guns are bad so we can't do that anymore.

Didn't they stop to do an audit?

All I remember off the top of my head is that part of the defense budget switched whomever was in charge of the program and removed federal funding. That was two years after the AWB was passed.

I like that I can own something that is both a skill and hobby I can get better at and I can defend myself.

I, unlike the constitutional theorists, do not believe I will ever have to feed the tree of liberty. I do believe that I can do nothing to change the fact that there are 200+million guns out there, and the best answer to someone trying to use on against me, is that I have one, preferably a better one, and I have the superior skill.

And gun or no gun, I refuse to sit back and wait for the cops during a home invasion, whether they are armed or not.

Giltric:Mugato: I love how gun nuts have this masturbatory fantasy about fighting our own military.

Probably as sick as the fantasy gun grabbers have of a government that kills its own citizenry while confiscating firearms in order to prevent violence.

Well I think they're both sick. And despite what you probably think, I'm not a gun grabber. I just find this idea that you all are preparing for when the gov't gets out of line farking hilarious. I have a gun too. I shoot with dad because it's fun. Just admit that you want all those toys because you like to shoot but don't pretend you could ever be any real threat to the US armed forces.

/these are the same people who put magnetic ribbons on their car//but if you get out of line, we'll fark you up

griffer:And gun or no gun, I refuse to sit back and wait for the cops during a home invasion, whether they are armed or not.

My brother's a cop. He'll be the first to tell you he can't protect you. I mean, he isn't sitting out front my house, waiting. It's the same reason I have a fire extinguisher in my house even though the fire department is just down the road.

redmid17:Frank N Stein: redmid17: Frank N Stein: To those that think an armed citizenry cannot over throw the government: You won't sound so smug when Tea Baggers take over the country and you have armored hover rounds rolling down your street

/In actuality a citizenry that can properly shoot would be very important in a time of nation crisis/invasion/draft.//Shooting clubs taught future WW2 GIs how to operate the M1 before they entered service

The US Army ran a civilian marksmanship program for almost 100 years AND sold surplus rifles to the members of said program until 1996, but guns are bad so we can't do that anymore.

Love the CMP. Looking for an affiliated club so I can get my hands on a Garand

Haha I wish I could afford a garand. I'll stick with my $99 mosin-nagant and its dirty ammo for the time being

/farking cosmoline

You can keep your commie gun. I'll be over hear breathing the sweet air of freedom that only the gases from a freshly shot 30-06 can produce :)

Giltric:What a shame that there are no licensing or evaluations to prevent you from spreading your seed and passing on your mental deficiencies to offspring.

Too late...I've procreated. And my kids f*cking LOVE guns! My little girl has a pink AR-15 and my son has his own AK and Saiga 12 now that he's big enough to handle the kick. I mean, they aren't allowed to take their guns to school or nothin'...that's why I got them each a spring assisted folding knife.

Semi-automatic simply means when you pul the trigger, one shot is fired and the next round is loaded automatically. It is half (semi) automatic, only the loading cycle is automatic. Examples of semi-automatic weapons include varmint rifles, Ruger mini rifles, 1911 handguns, police handguns such as Beretta M9s and Glocks or all types.

Fully-automatic means the loading AND firing happen automatically. You hold the trigger down and you get multiple shots. Some designs limit the number of rapid fire shots in a single pull, others simply fire until the ammo is exhausted or the trigger is released.

Machine Pistols are a specific type of weapon that use pistol calibers, versus rifle calibers, are are capably of fully automatic fire. Mac 10s are examples of these. The early Tec 9s could be converted to machine pistols.

Semi-automatic rifles come in many styles and are used for hunting and target shooting. Semi-auto handguns are the most common among law enforcement today and are preferred for self defense and carry models. FBI and Secret Service carry semi-automatic pistols. Skill has nothing to do with the platform.

And as long as this is a ballistics primer, you should know that fully automatic fire, even from a shoulder fired rifle, is not accurate. Even more so in a hand-held, short barreled weapon like a machine pistol. Tactically, it is primarily used as 'suppression' fire. In a military engagement, the preferred shots are aimed single shots, but to force an enemy position to take cover and not return fire, spraying a volume or rounds, that may lack accuracy, soldiers switch to full auto.

Alright, you got me there. I always categorized semi-auto as the 2 or 3-round-burst selective fire. I still think anything that could fire more than one bullet per trigger pull is unnecessary, but I admit I got my terms mixed.

TheJoe03:Are people here really implying that guns should be banned because of this assclown? I guess some people are too blind to see the ramifications of such an action. Maybe they think a law would make guns disappear or something or perhaps they trust in people so much they assume no one would dare sell a gun if they were illegal. Maybe they also believe criminals and dangerous people would stop using guns if they become illegal.

Al_Ed:Giltric: What a shame that there are no licensing or evaluations to prevent you from spreading your seed and passing on your mental deficiencies to offspring.

Too late...I've procreated. And my kids f*cking LOVE guns! My little girl has a pink AR-15 and my son has his own AK and Saiga 12 now that he's big enough to handle the kick. I mean, they aren't allowed to take their guns to school or nothin'...that's why I got them each a spring assisted folding knife.

Semi-automatic simply means when you pul the trigger, one shot is fired and the next round is loaded automatically. It is half (semi) automatic, only the loading cycle is automatic. Examples of semi-automatic weapons include varmint rifles, Ruger mini rifles, 1911 handguns, police handguns such as Beretta M9s and Glocks or all types.

Fully-automatic means the loading AND firing happen automatically. You hold the trigger down and you get multiple shots. Some designs limit the number of rapid fire shots in a single pull, others simply fire until the ammo is exhausted or the trigger is released.

Machine Pistols are a specific type of weapon that use pistol calibers, versus rifle calibers, are are capably of fully automatic fire. Mac 10s are examples of these. The early Tec 9s could be converted to machine pistols.

Semi-automatic rifles come in many styles and are used for hunting and target shooting. Semi-auto handguns are the most common among law enforcement today and are preferred for self defense and carry models. FBI and Secret Service carry semi-automatic pistols. Skill has nothing to do with the platform.

And as long as this is a ballistics primer, you should know that fully automatic fire, even from a shoulder fired rifle, is not accurate. Even more so in a hand-held, short barreled weapon like a machine pistol. Tactically, it is primarily used as 'suppression' fire. In a military engagement, the preferred shots are aimed single shots, but to force an enemy position to take cover and not return fire, spraying a volume or rounds, that may lack accuracy, soldiers switch to full auto.

Alright, you got me there. I always categorized semi-auto as the 2 or 3-round-burst selective fire. I still think anything that could fire more than on ...

Your acknowledgement of error has revealed my previous assessment of dishonesty to be in error. I apologize for my mistake.

AngryJailhouseFistfark:brigid_fitch: Don't know if this was posted yet but someone on CNN this morning suggested that he set up the booby traps as a diversion prior to him gunning down theater patrons. He put on some techno music full-volume before leaving for the theater. The guess is he expected a neighbor to complain & someone, either the superintendent or the cops, to open the door, triggering a bunch of bombs & gasoline, and blow the building sky-high. That would give him more time for his rampage while first-responders were dealing with an apartment building on fire.

Seems rather complicated. Why not just put the explosives on a timer, that'd be more reliable than the off-chance someone comes a-knockin', or calls cops who'll bust in the door.

Agreed but maybe a timer was too complicated, so he decided on a trip-wire (which we know he used) and nosy neighbors, And maybe he didn't call the cops because his phone would be traced? Again, just speculation. It seemed to me the most logical explanation since he apparently TOLD the cops about the booby traps. Why tell them if he just wanted a higher body count?

quiotu:Alright, you got me there. I always categorized semi-auto as the 2 or 3-round-burst selective fire. I still think anything that could fire more than one bullet per trigger pull is unnecessary, but I admit I got my terms mixed.

You have to be a federally licensed firearm dealer to own one of those bad boys.

With the limited firearms knowledge displayed by the gun grabbers that want to legislate restrictive laws on the issue, I'm reminded of the "series of tubes" Internet comment. Internet geeks across the country slammed the senator's ignorance on the subject and the power he wields over laws on said subject.

misanthropologist:TheJoe03: Are people here really implying that guns should be banned because of this assclown? I guess some people are too blind to see the ramifications of such an action. Maybe they think a law would make guns disappear or something or perhaps they trust in people so much they assume no one would dare sell a gun if they were illegal. Maybe they also believe criminals and dangerous people would stop using guns if they become illegal.

Yes, of course people are really implying that guns should be banned because of this - and only this - assclown. This is an isolated incident. It's certainly nothing systemic in American society today. For proof of that, check out this list of 125 fatal mass shootings between Columbine (April 20, 1999) and Aurora (July 20, 2012). If you want to crunch some numbers, that's a rate of at least 1 fatal mass shooting per 1.3 months in the past 13 years.

Just a quick question: Do you know how many of those shootings were gang and drug related versus "psycho shoots up a school"?

redmid17:misanthropologist: TheJoe03: Are people here really implying that guns should be banned because of this assclown? I guess some people are too blind to see the ramifications of such an action. Maybe they think a law would make guns disappear or something or perhaps they trust in people so much they assume no one would dare sell a gun if they were illegal. Maybe they also believe criminals and dangerous people would stop using guns if they become illegal.

Yes, of course people are really implying that guns should be banned because of this - and only this - assclown. This is an isolated incident. It's certainly nothing systemic in American society today. For proof of that, check out this list of 125 fatal mass shootings between Columbine (April 20, 1999) and Aurora (July 20, 2012). If you want to crunch some numbers, that's a rate of at least 1 fatal mass shooting per 1.3 months in the past 13 years.

Just a quick question: Do you know how many of those shootings were gang and drug related versus "psycho shoots up a school"?

Is such a distinction necessary? Obviously, the objectionable element is the firearm; had mass homicides been committed with other implements, they would have been acceptable.

Look at all the other stuff this guy put together: a timer wouldn't be too complicated. He wanted to taunt the cops and sit smirking in the patrol car when the radio call came back saying police were killed when the bomb went off as they tried to gain access to his apartment.

Mugato:Giltric: Mugato: I love how gun nuts have this masturbatory fantasy about fighting our own military.

Probably as sick as the fantasy gun grabbers have of a government that kills its own citizenry while confiscating firearms in order to prevent violence.

Well I think they're both sick. And despite what you probably think, I'm not a gun grabber. I just find this idea that you all are preparing for when the gov't gets out of line farking hilarious. I have a gun too. I shoot with dad because it's fun. Just admit that you want all those toys because you like to shoot but don't pretend you could ever be any real threat to the US armed forces.

/these are the same people who put magnetic ribbons on their car//but if you get out of line, we'll fark you up

I'm not preparing for the government getting out of line, but Id rather err on the side of caution and be allowed to own a modern military style semi automatic firearm with a pistol grip and detachable magazine of 20+ rounds then have to rely on filling out a piece of paper and slipping it into a suggestion box as some guy in green is staring at me through his AO-Tech.

quiotu:I still think anything that could fire more than one bullet per trigger pull is unnecessary

And so does our current law.

That's cool. Actually listening is what makes for a calm, rational discussion.

I didn't mean to GET you, I genuinely thought I could clarify terms.

So, now how does that information set with you? The shooter only got one bullet per trigger pull.

Here is another one for you to wrap your brain around.

The media makes a big deal about the Beta Mag. A high capacity magazine that holds 100 rounds.

There are a couple reason the military doesn't count on these mags in combat. They jam, and they are large and heavy. I believe the weight contributes to the jamming.

The shooter got off about 60 rounds from this magazine before it jammed.

The media has made a big deal about how many shot COULD be fired in a minute.

Now, a standard magazine for this type of gun is 30 rounds. A trained magazine swap- eject the empy, load a fresh 30 round mag and close the bolt- takes only 1 second. I could fire 3 magazines or 90 rounds in a little over a minute, I can do 2 mags and 60, easily. Single shot. In an afternoon, so could you.

Dimensio:redmid17: misanthropologist: TheJoe03: Are people here really implying that guns should be banned because of this assclown? I guess some people are too blind to see the ramifications of such an action. Maybe they think a law would make guns disappear or something or perhaps they trust in people so much they assume no one would dare sell a gun if they were illegal. Maybe they also believe criminals and dangerous people would stop using guns if they become illegal.

Yes, of course people are really implying that guns should be banned because of this - and only this - assclown. This is an isolated incident. It's certainly nothing systemic in American society today. For proof of that, check out this list of 125 fatal mass shootings between Columbine (April 20, 1999) and Aurora (July 20, 2012). If you want to crunch some numbers, that's a rate of at least 1 fatal mass shooting per 1.3 months in the past 13 years.

Just a quick question: Do you know how many of those shootings were gang and drug related versus "psycho shoots up a school"?

Is such a distinction necessary? Obviously, the objectionable element is the firearm; had mass homicides been committed with other implements, they would have been acceptable.

Well yes. The war on drugs obviously influences the former and does nothing for the latter. Establishing the root cause lets us work on eliminating the problem at the source. If it's 125 psycho shooters, then obviously start with healthcare. If it's 124 drug shootings (with illegally acquired guns most likely), then you probably want to start with that.

OnlyM3:The grenades were wired to a control box in the kitchen, which bomb technicians disabled with the help of a remote-controlled robot that squirted water on it.My farking heroes. A (multi?)million dollar robot to do the job of a super-soaker.